You are blowing this way out of proportion.
Privacy is one thing, but I personally don't think crimes that affect... you know.. a country deserve that excuse to remain hidden. Whether or not it's a government, industry, or individual shouldn't matter. Inexcusable actions remain inexcusable whether or not people know about them, and people do deserve to know about them, because then something can be done to address the issue.
In regards to what you were saying about evidence released by wikileaks being void in court... you're making it sound as if any crime published by wikileaks is granted legal immunity. If wikileaks publishes evidence of one person murdering another, then all one has to do is legally obtain the evidence themselves. If an officer legally obtains a security tape of a crime, no judge would rule the evidence as void simply because wikileaks published the tape first. It doesn't matter how others obtain evidence; what matters is how the prosecution obtains it.
Over in the actual article (I know, nobody ever reads it, but I still did), they say this:
Rich Martell, 21, a final-year computer sciences student at University College London, has taken the site down under pressure from university authorities, who were concerned that it was distracting students from their studies.
The/. summary also says this:
"A computer science student at University College London..."
There was no need to read the actual article to know that this did not take place in the United States
Mod parent up. He's completely right--the electrical signals of the brain have to be interpreted by computer software in order to do the most basic of functions. It took years just to get a monkey to move a robotic arm, or a quadriplegic to use a computer mouse. You can't just connect something to the brain and expect it to eventually work.
...a man suspected of drug-smuggling and sentenced to death...
I'm surprised nobody has said anything about this. Sentenced to death for smuggling drugs? That's more of a problem than twin's getting away with theft and... well... drug smuggling.
It means "exploit" a reader as in "take advantage of a bug in", not "make use of in any way".
In other words, a perfectly coded pdf reader with zero bugs whatsoever would still be vulnerable..
You contradicted yourself from one sentence to the next. I'm not trying to be a Grammar Nazi here, I'm just honestly wondering if it was intentional, because the only thing I've gathered from your comment is "don't use Foxit." The rest doesn't make much sense.
Your definition of sanity does not apply simply because the man is intelligent. For example, think of John Nash, the Nobel Prize Winner with schizophrenia. That guy hallucinated to the point where he thought he had a roommate throughout college, even though he lived in a single by himself.
the system could one day be used to generate power from anything that produces noise — cars whizzing by on the highway, crashing waves in the ocean, or planes landing at an airport.
...what about nightclubs? I'm pretty sure the heavy bass would be able to produce at least enough energy to cover the lights, especially since they're off for the most part.
How about not just trying to not be evil but trying to be good?
I like how you consider bringing business to China "evil." Many Chinese citizens are in need of work, and their laws allow foreign investors to take advantage of the cheap labor available. True, the U.S. isn't in the best economic situation, but it's still not "evil" to give work to people in another country who need it, even if you don't like their government.
Woolworths' application includes a wide class for electrical goods and technology, putting it in direct competition with Apple should the retailer choose to brand computers, music players or other devices.
I guess the following bit from the article was just taken out of context:
''Based on this logic, they would have to take action against every fruit-seller.''
I agree with this. The majority of people who conduct these studies and find that video games "make people more violent" are generally trying to prove that they do. Probably everyone can attest to at least one friend they know that acts more aggressive while playing games, but definitely not after. My own brother swears like a sailor when he plays flash games about amoebas and Tetris and the like; it's more of a competitive aggression than a response to violence.
Also, in terms of desensitizing, it's more likely that the news desensitizes people than violent video games. Nobody even flinches nowadays when they hear about another car bomb or some other terrorist attack. Killings happen daily; it's a pretty well-known fact. When the news constantly report it, people stop caring. Playing Halo 3 or COD: Modern Warfare 2 aren't what make people yawn when they hear about the latest tragedy befalling people in Darfur, Rwanda, etc. It's the fact that when news stations constantly report such things, they simply become... expected.
There are only three companies that I'd expect to ever surprise me with the markets they might potentially invade in the future: Walmart, Microsoft, and Google. I frankly would not be surprised if Walmart set their sights on the internet, nor if Google came out with their own phone service (emphasis on the service, I know they already have the Nexus). I can definitely also see Microsoft coming out with their own "smartphone".
Yes, Google should have some competition, however do you really think that Microsoft really needs to get any bigger?
We've been hearing about Apple and Google going at each other's throats for quite some time now. I'd like to see if Apple ever steps up with a search engine of their own.
So what's the hottest where absolutely nothing can exist?
That is what I was refuting. I did not say that there was not a maximum temperature (although I am not aware of one), what I said was that there is no temperature at which "nothing can exist."
Slashdot Mirror
You are blowing this way out of proportion. Privacy is one thing, but I personally don't think crimes that affect... you know.. a country deserve that excuse to remain hidden. Whether or not it's a government, industry, or individual shouldn't matter. Inexcusable actions remain inexcusable whether or not people know about them, and people do deserve to know about them, because then something can be done to address the issue. In regards to what you were saying about evidence released by wikileaks being void in court... you're making it sound as if any crime published by wikileaks is granted legal immunity. If wikileaks publishes evidence of one person murdering another, then all one has to do is legally obtain the evidence themselves. If an officer legally obtains a security tape of a crime, no judge would rule the evidence as void simply because wikileaks published the tape first. It doesn't matter how others obtain evidence; what matters is how the prosecution obtains it.
If you RTFA, it says you can reduce the effects of sitting if you exercise your ass. No homo.
The Life of David Gale or something like that.
In the movie, the guy actually says: "I will give you a good grade--a VERY good grade--if you would just... study."
Can anyone beat 1994? There must be earlier stuff than that..
A real book. 3000 B.C.
There are more Londons in the US than in the UK.
Yes, but University College London isn't in any of those.
Over in the actual article (I know, nobody ever reads it, but I still did), they say this:
The /. summary also says this:
"A computer science student at University College London..."
There was no need to read the actual article to know that this did not take place in the United States
Mod parent up. He's completely right--the electrical signals of the brain have to be interpreted by computer software in order to do the most basic of functions. It took years just to get a monkey to move a robotic arm, or a quadriplegic to use a computer mouse. You can't just connect something to the brain and expect it to eventually work.
...a man suspected of drug-smuggling and sentenced to death...
I'm surprised nobody has said anything about this. Sentenced to death for smuggling drugs? That's more of a problem than twin's getting away with theft and... well... drug smuggling.
It means "exploit" a reader as in "take advantage of a bug in", not "make use of in any way".
In other words, a perfectly coded pdf reader with zero bugs whatsoever would still be vulnerable..
You contradicted yourself from one sentence to the next. I'm not trying to be a Grammar Nazi here, I'm just honestly wondering if it was intentional, because the only thing I've gathered from your comment is "don't use Foxit." The rest doesn't make much sense.
Your definition of sanity does not apply simply because the man is intelligent. For example, think of John Nash, the Nobel Prize Winner with schizophrenia. That guy hallucinated to the point where he thought he had a roommate throughout college, even though he lived in a single by himself.
If you read the article, you would've noticed that it mentioned SEVERAL times that this had NOTHING to do with dark matter.
the system could one day be used to generate power from anything that produces noise — cars whizzing by on the highway, crashing waves in the ocean, or planes landing at an airport.
...what about nightclubs? I'm pretty sure the heavy bass would be able to produce at least enough energy to cover the lights, especially since they're off for the most part.
Not to nit pick, but there is no plural form of Virus.
I will nit pick. The plural of virus is viruses: http://tinyurl.com/amfm3q
Not to nit pick, but there is no plural form of Virus.
I will nit pick. The plural form of virus IS viruses: http://tinyurl.com/amfm3q
How about not just trying to not be evil but trying to be good?
I like how you consider bringing business to China "evil." Many Chinese citizens are in need of work, and their laws allow foreign investors to take advantage of the cheap labor available. True, the U.S. isn't in the best economic situation, but it's still not "evil" to give work to people in another country who need it, even if you don't like their government.
(Woolworths sells real apples.)
Quote from the article:
Woolworths' application includes a wide class for electrical goods and technology, putting it in direct competition with Apple should the retailer choose to brand computers, music players or other devices.
I guess the following bit from the article was just taken out of context:
''Based on this logic, they would have to take action against every fruit-seller.''
This is probably the most significant leak to date...
Seems like people have forgotten about the R Kelly incident already.
I can definitely also see Microsoft coming out with their own "smartphone".
Called it.
I agree with this. The majority of people who conduct these studies and find that video games "make people more violent" are generally trying to prove that they do. Probably everyone can attest to at least one friend they know that acts more aggressive while playing games, but definitely not after. My own brother swears like a sailor when he plays flash games about amoebas and Tetris and the like; it's more of a competitive aggression than a response to violence.
Also, in terms of desensitizing, it's more likely that the news desensitizes people than violent video games. Nobody even flinches nowadays when they hear about another car bomb or some other terrorist attack. Killings happen daily; it's a pretty well-known fact. When the news constantly report it, people stop caring. Playing Halo 3 or COD: Modern Warfare 2 aren't what make people yawn when they hear about the latest tragedy befalling people in Darfur, Rwanda, etc. It's the fact that when news stations constantly report such things, they simply become... expected.
There are only three companies that I'd expect to ever surprise me with the markets they might potentially invade in the future: Walmart, Microsoft, and Google. I frankly would not be surprised if Walmart set their sights on the internet, nor if Google came out with their own phone service (emphasis on the service, I know they already have the Nexus). I can definitely also see Microsoft coming out with their own "smartphone".
Yes, Google should have some competition, however do you really think that Microsoft really needs to get any bigger? We've been hearing about Apple and Google going at each other's throats for quite some time now. I'd like to see if Apple ever steps up with a search engine of their own.
So what's the hottest where absolutely nothing can exist?
That is what I was refuting. I did not say that there was not a maximum temperature (although I am not aware of one), what I said was that there is no temperature at which "nothing can exist."
Because of people like me who live in an area where my choices are Comcast or Dial-up.
I guess you haven't heard of Google's free internet service.
They can just say it's foreign or something. That way, they can keep charging more for their services while offering less :)